D : Not for me anymore
brunodomedeiros+spam at com.gmail
Mon Oct 23 07:11:17 PDT 2006
Sean Kelly wrote:
> Bruno Medeiros wrote:
>> Sean Kelly wrote:
>>> Lionello Lunesu wrote:
>>>> "Walter Bright" <newshound at digitalmars.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:eh0hgs$q8h$1 at digitaldaemon.com...
>>>>> I'm happy to merge things in, but am reluctant to do so without
>>>>> reviewing the diffs line by line.
>>>> That's what we have now. I think it's time for you to let go of Phobos.
>>> It's a bit more complicated than that, since Phobos includes a bunch
>>> of compiler runtime code used by DMD. This is also why GDC has a
>>> separate GPhobos where the only substantive difference is this
>>> runtime code.
>>>> There can't be a community lead standard library from which you take
>>>> patches to include into DMD's distribution.
>>> Sure there can.
>>> > We'd end up with another Ares.
>>> I think Ares isn't used widely for two (or perhaps three) reasons:
>>> * Visibility
>>> * Features
>>> * Endorsement (maybe)
>> Speaking of Ares, there is something I've wanted to have clarified,
>> which is apropos to this discussion:
>> My issue with Ares, is actually one of objective/purpose. The goal of
>> Ares is stated to be an alternative to Phobos, but my question is how
>> much of an alternative?
>> Is it meant as a general, encompassing alternative to Phobos, targeted
>> to the general (D) programmer populace, or is it a specific
>> alternative, where it aims to deal with some issues you (and some more
>> coders) have with Phobos, but not go further than that? Because a
>> standard lib is a wide and ranged collection of code, and all modules
>> and aspects of it need to be well-considered.
> It's original aim was to be a complete replacement, but a lack of
> community participation changed the focus a bit. Ares is now really
> just a minimal framework on top of which a standard library may be
> built. And progress there has stalled a bit in the past few months
> because I've been too busy with other things. However, I do have some
> redesign ideas in mind that should hopefully bear fruit before too
> terribly long. And these are intended both to address deficiencies in
> the original design and to hopefully make for the beginnings of a better
That's good to hear. For an example of what I meant in the previous
post, here's two things I think should be in the standard library, and
for what I see they are not in Ares (as well as Phobos):
* the write/writeln unformating output functions.
* extended path&file management functions, like Kramer's pathext:
Bruno Medeiros - MSc in CS/E student
More information about the Digitalmars-d